Prop2 Family

1235»

Comments

  • Cluso99 wrote: »
    There are just going to be those times where a lot of Hub RAM is going to be wanted IMHO.

    MRAM! Non-volatile but infinitely better than Flash on endurance, as small as DRAM on feature size, and fast enough to be used as HubRAM.
  • evanhevanh Posts: 9,625
    edited 2016-05-31 - 11:47:30
    And fully random access too, unlike Flash. Considered suitable as a DRAM replacement.
  • I must say very impressive progress on the P2, now there's a whole family? Arduino Family seems to be shrinking into a core bunch. My SAM3X8E based "DUE" is already "obsolete". Prop 1 was and still is a mind blowing achievement. I hope that the Prop 2 family comes to fruition soon. I do miss OOP, I dislike Interrupts and having to do "serial" programming. I do like C++ though. But I really miss OOP on the prop, coding was so much simpler...

    Great work on progress thus far. My automotive headlights prototypes could use a Prop 2 (or maybe more) ; ) .
  • Would be cool to have a DIP module that has 40 pins and is a drop-in (but obviously not code-compatible) replacement for P1 designs.

    ===Jac
  • r.daneelr.daneel Posts: 96
    edited 2016-09-22 - 02:04:10
    I seem to be coming late to this conversation - I've been out recuperating for about a year (still recuperating, but at least able to get back to some work now...).

    I see some discussion here around the merits of, and likelihood of availability of, DIP versions of P2. Is Parallax seriously considering not providing the P2 in DIP packaging? If so, sadly that will be a showstopper for me. I teach kids from about 10 -15 years old. I teach an introductory robotics class, as well as a more advanced class - but the focus is on understanding how the robots and chips work, and programming the robots rather than building them. We use Boe-Bots, SumoBots and Prop-1 chips and a bunch of sensors etc. None of the construction requires soldering - everything is done on bread boards, and it really needs to be done that way: different classes use the same hardware, so it needs to be pulled down ready for the next class, or a chip needs be easily replaced when the kids run 12v through it instead of 3v - and the kids don't know how to solder (and certainly don't have the finesse to be soldering surface mount stuff - and neither do I really - and we just don't have the time for that in class anyway).

    If the P2 isn't going to be available in some form of DIP packaging, then eventually I'll need to move to something that is... The P1 is fine for now (great, actually), but down the track the school needs to be sure that what I'm using will continue to be available, and not "old" technology etc. I get that there are adapter boards around that the chips could be soldered to, but the kids can't do that, and frankly neither can I.

    I'm about to restart teaching after a break of a year, and I'll need to be putting my proposals of hardware to the school. Will the P2 really not be available in DIP form?

  • For smaller pin-count devices, we will have DIP, but for the flagship part, we must use a QFP-100.
  • D.PD.P Posts: 790
    edited 2016-09-22 - 02:42:02
    No worries I'm sure someone will make some Dual Row breakout boards for you, heck probably put a power supply on it et al with all that room.

    See HERE

    EDIT, that item is for 48 pins only, we need 96 I think for the P2 so it would be a custom part, never fear though someone will help you out.
  • jmgjmg Posts: 14,371
    r.daneel wrote: »

    I see some discussion here around the merits of, and likelihood of availability of, DIP versions of P2. Is Parallax seriously considering not providing the P2 in DIP packaging? If so, sadly that will be a showstopper for me. I teach kids from about 10 -15 years old. I teach an introductory robotics class, as well as a more advanced class - but the focus is on understanding how the robots and chips work, and programming the robots rather than building them. We use Boe-Bots, SumoBots and Prop-1 chips and a bunch of sensors etc. None of the construction requires soldering - everything is done on bread boards, and it really needs to be done that way: different classes use the same hardware, so it needs to be pulled down ready for the next class, or a chip needs be easily replaced when the kids run 12v through it instead of 3v - and the kids don't know how to solder (and certainly don't have the finesse to be soldering surface mount stuff - and neither do I really - and we just don't have the time for that in class anyway).

    If the P2 isn't going to be available in some form of DIP packaging, then eventually I'll need to move to something that is... The P1 is fine for now (great, actually), but down the track the school needs to be sure that what I'm using will continue to be available, and not "old" technology etc. I get that there are adapter boards around that the chips could be soldered to, but the kids can't do that, and frankly neither can I.

    I'm about to restart teaching after a break of a year, and I'll need to be putting my proposals of hardware to the school. Will the P2 really not be available in DIP form?

    The P2 Chip is being done in a TQFP100EP package, but you are more asking about modules, not the chip itself. "everything is done on bread boards"

    RaspberryPi's are very widely used in education, and no one says they cannot use it, because Broadcom do not sell a DIP MPU -- they simply use the PCB module, not the bare chip itself.

    A smarter question to ask is, what form will the first P2 breakout boards take ?

  • Well no, right now I use the 40-pin Prop 1 on breadboards. It costs me $8. If one of the kids destroys it we pop it off the breadboard and pop a new one in. If I have to buy P2 modules/breakout boards (that have to be populated already - I won't be soldering chips to breakout boards) I suspect they'll be more expensive than a plain DIP format chip - and when the kids destroy them it'll cost me more to replace them. I don't particularly want to use Raspberry Pis or anything else. The beauty of the Prop is its power and simplicity. I don't need a breakout board for the P1 - I can just pop it onto a breadboard and add a few bits and have the kids playing with a multi-core processor and multiple sensors - at $8 a throw. If I have to start buying the P2 as a module with a breakout board, it kind-of defeats the purpose - I just want the chip so that kids can add the bits and understand what they're building up. And when they destroy it I'd rather replace a minimum cost chip than a more costly module.
  • jmgjmg Posts: 14,371
    r.daneel wrote: »
    The beauty of the Prop is its power and simplicity. I don't need a breakout board for the P1 ...
    Then it sounds like you already have a good-fit solution, and the P1 is not going away :)

  • Last time I checked with the packaging company they had no interest in making DIP parts anymore, especially for low volume. Unless Chip has checked with them and obtained prices I don't think we can say for certain that a DIP would be produced except for a very high cost to everybody.

    Ken Gracey
  • jmgjmg Posts: 14,371
    Ken Gracey wrote: »
    Last time I checked with the packaging company they had no interest in making DIP parts anymore, especially for low volume. Unless Chip has checked with them and obtained prices I don't think we can say for certain that a DIP would be produced except for a very high cost to everybody.

    Is that talking about P2, or P1 ?

    Other vendors have been quietly dropping DIP, or elevating the DIP price so that TQFP and DIP are no longer the same.
    In Asia, I've noticed a trend to offer 0.8mm gull wing parts, and some vendors even have two 64 pin part codes.
    One at 0.5mm, for smallest PCB, plus the 0.8mm that can wave solder.

  • r.daneel wrote: »
    Well no, right now I use the 40-pin Prop 1 on breadboards. It costs me $8. If one of the kids destroys it we pop it off the breadboard and pop a new one in. If I have to buy P2 modules/breakout boards (that have to be populated already - I won't be soldering chips to breakout boards) I suspect they'll be more expensive than a plain DIP format chip - and when the kids destroy them it'll cost me more to replace them. I don't particularly want to use Raspberry Pis or anything else. The beauty of the Prop is its power and simplicity. I don't need a breakout board for the P1 - I can just pop it onto a breadboard and add a few bits and have the kids playing with a multi-core processor and multiple sensors - at $8 a throw. If I have to start buying the P2 as a module with a breakout board, it kind-of defeats the purpose - I just want the chip so that kids can add the bits and understand what they're building up. And when they destroy it I'd rather replace a minimum cost chip than a more costly module.

    I would used enhanced breadboards with large protection diodes and fuses so the kids could cross connect stuff at will without destroying parts. Huh, my tax dollars at work :)
  • r.daneelr.daneel Posts: 96
    edited 2016-09-22 - 03:42:48
    Actually, I fund a lot of the bits myself - the school isn't that flush with money... so not your tax dollars :-)

    But the ability to make a mistake and see what happens (smoke and heat usually) is actually a valuable learning experience for the kids.

    Any maybe the P1 isn't going away - but the P2 is better (or will be, hopefully). I could still be using the 8088/8086, but I'm not...

    And Ken, that's a real shame.
  • I was referring to the possibility of a new DIP, the P2. The P1 continues to be available in a DIP format without significant extra expense.
  • If this is meant to be real, I would be interested in the 8 cog version with 32 smart pins. However, why not a 16 cog version with 32 pins?
  • evanhevanh Posts: 9,625
    edited 2016-10-25 - 10:48:51
    samuell wrote: »
    ... why not a 16 cog version with 32 pins?

    Won't fit in that smaller package. The full sized Prop2 needs all of the space available (8.5x8.5) in its 100 pin package.
  • evanh wrote: »
    samuell wrote: »
    ... why not a 16 cog version with 32 pins?

    Won't fit in that smaller package. The full sized Prop2 needs all of the space available (8.5x8.5) in its 100 pin package.
    evanh wrote: »
    Thanks evanh,

    Indeed it makes sense, since I've heard that Parallax was(is) struggling with the die size on a 180nm process.

    Kind regards, Samuel Lourenço
  • r.daneel wrote: »
    Actually, I fund a lot of the bits myself - the school isn't that flush with money... so not your tax dollars :-)

    But the ability to make a mistake and see what happens (smoke and heat usually) is actually a valuable learning experience for the kids.

    Any maybe the P1 isn't going away - but the P2 is better (or will be, hopefully). I could still be using the 8088/8086, but I'm not...

    And Ken, that's a real shame.

    I'm not sure if I'm impressed or depressed.

    You have 10-15 year-olds who have exhausted the P1's capabilities?

    If those were my kids, I'd forego the XBox/Playstation and fill their Xmas stockings with Parallax products...LOL
  • User NameUser Name Posts: 1,451
    edited 2016-10-27 - 15:33:03
    Mickster wrote: »
    You have 10-15 year-olds who have exhausted the P1's capabilities?
    LOL. Had a similar reaction but you articulated it better.

    Seriously, the P2 may not be 'better' for every situation. The greater size and complexity needed to deliver greater capacity and throughput may simply be in the way in some situations. Erco has made some very clever devices with some very simple and primitive chips.

    The P1 pretty much resides at the apex of approachable and capable.


Sign In or Register to comment.